Explain the 3 pillars of diversity, relativism, and toleration in the theory of Ethical relativism.
. In this paper I will discuss “failure” and “success” in regards to the uprisings; “failure” entailing that the uprising did not produce a change in the government while “success” entails the replacement of autocratic leaders with a new form of government. Although some states “succeeded”, it does not necessarily correlate with the success of a state overall; for example, Tunisia and Libya both experienced a change in government rule however both are considered “failed states” as neither has come up with a successful rebuttal to the prior regime in order to stabilize the country. Loyalty The Arab world has a long history of repression through authoritarian rule, but why were some countries able to succeed in overthrowing the regime for change while others failed? Fewer than half of Arab States had uprisings, and old four succeeded in revolution. Many argue that a younger population leads to uprisings, however there is stronger correlation correlation between young unemployment rates and successful uprisings rather than just looking at age, as many states with young populations didn’t have any uprisings at all. We also examine how the diffusion of social networks contributed to success, as well as the posture of the army in such state. We can dissect all three of these variables through historical regime characteristics that determined relative balance of power between oppositionists and the regime itself thus better identifying the roots of successful and failed authoritarian rule. When looking at such correlations we can conclude early on that the military was the heart of determining whether the tensions of protest would result in revolution, and when looking at the military’s role we can determine that it is conditioned by the states oil wealth and historical hereditary rule. States who have succeeded in the oil market and states who have had successful hereditary transfer of power see more loyalty in the military thus protecting the regime against opposition. States who succeeded in revolution had a lack of oil wealth as well as non-successful transfer of dynastic power within the regime, resulting in disloyalty towards the regime within the military and therefore successful revolution. This explanation of structural variables such as oil wealth and dynastic rule could’ve been measured before these events and therefore predicted the outcomes of such uprisings. We saw different amounts of repression in each of the studied states, however this was not a defining factor in the outcome of uprisings. We only saw faltered regimes in states where the military turned against such regime. The fusion of oil wealth and hereditary rule in certain Arab states increased the regimes despotic power on their people and military, giving such regimes more coercive power on the situations that raised in 2011. We see a correlation>GET ANSWER